Counting what counts: Research on community interpreting in Germanspeaking countries—A scientometric study

Nadja Grbić and Sonja Pöllabauer

Abstract

This paper presents the results of a study on research on spoken and signed language community interpreting (CI) in German-speaking countries (Austria, Germany, German-speaking regions of Switzerland). A set of different scientometric, network analytical and text linguistic (keyword analysis, title word analysis, co-occurrence analysis) methodological tools is used to investigate this specific field of research. The paper is a follow-up to a first brief introductory paper on that topic (Grbić and Pöllabauer 2006a) and presents an in-depth analysis of the subject. The corpus of the study includes 595 publications on research into spoken and signed CI in German-speaking countries, which were published between 1979 and 2006. It was compiled on the basis of a comprehensive search of the literature. The study focuses, among other aspects, on the types of documents published in that field of research (with a specific focus on journal articles, collective volumes, papers in collective volumes, graduation and doctoral theses) and the nature of the publications, the overall growth rates of publications on that field, the most common languages of publication, the disciplinary affiliation of the authors, the agents (people, institutions) involved in researching CI as well as the networks of authors and co-authorships, and the topics touched upon in research on CI and the most common co-occurrences of topics.

Keywords
Table of contents

In this paper we focus on research on spoken and sign language (SL) community interpreting (CI) in German-speaking countries. Our findings are based on a combination of scientometric, network analytical and text linguistic (word analysis, co-occurrence analysis) methodological tools.

Full-text access is restricted to subscribers. Log in to obtain additional credentials. For subscription information see Subscription & Price. Direct PDF access to this article can be purchased through our e-platform.

References

Bahadır, Şebnem
2000 “Von natürlichen Kommunikationskrücken zu professionellen Kom-munikationsbrücken (Reflexionen zum Berufsprofil und zur Ausbildung professioneller Dolmetscher im medizinischen, sozialen und juristischen Bereich)”. TEXTconTEXT 14 = NF4. 211–229.Google Scholar
[ p. 329 ]
Batagelj, Vladimir Andrej Mrvar
2006Pajek. Program for analysis and visualization of large networks. Reference manual. Version October 4, 2006. Ljubljana: University of Ljubljana, http://​vlado​.fmf​.uni​-lj​.si​/pub​/networks​/pajek/ [28.02.2007].Google Scholar
Bischoff, Alexander
2001Overcoming language barriers to health care in Switzerland. University of Basel. [Doctoral dissertation,]Google Scholar
Borde, Theda
2002Patientinnenorientierung im Kontext der soziokulturellen Vielfalt im Kran¬kenhaus. Vergleich der Erfahrungen und Wahrnehmungen deutscher und türkischer Pati¬entinnen sowie des Klinikpersonals zur Versorgungssituation in der Gynäkologie. Technical University of Berlin. [Doctoral dissertation.]Google Scholar
Bordons, María, Fernanda Morillo and Isabel Gómez
2004 “Analysis of cross-disciplinary re¬search through bibliometric tools”. Moed et al. 2004: 437–456. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Borgatti, Steve P., Martin G. Everett and Linton C. Freemann
1999UCINET 5.0. Version 1.0. Natick: Analytic Technologies.Google Scholar
Borgman, Christine L.
1990 “Editor’s introduction”. Borgman 1990a 10–27.Google Scholar
Borgman, Christine L.,
ed. 1990aScholarly communication and bibliometrics. Newbury Park, London and New Delhi: Sage.Google Scholar
Borgman, Christine L. and Jonathan Furner
2002 “Scholarly communication and bibliomet¬rics”. Blaise Cronin, ed. Annual review of information science and technology 36. Medford, NJ: Learned Information 2002 3–72, also http://​polaris​.gseis​.ucla​.edu​/jfurner​/arist02​.pdf [23.03.2007].Google Scholar
Braam, Robert R. Henk F. Moed and Anthony F. J. van Raan
1991 “Mapping of science by com-bined co-citation and word analysis I: Structural aspects”. Journal of the American society for information science 42:4. 252–266.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Cronin, Blaise and Kara Overfelt
1994 “Citation-based auditing of academic performance”. Journal of the American society for information science 45:2. 61–72.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Dietz, Gunther
1995Titel wissenschaftlicher Texte. Tübingen: Narr. [= Forum für Fachspra-chen-Forschung, 26.]Google Scholar
Gauthier, Élaine
1998Bibliometric analysis of scientific and technological research: A user’s guide to the methodology. Montreal: Université du Québec à Montréal, Observatoire des Sciences et des Technologies, http://​www​.ost​.uqam​.ca​/OSTE​/pdf​/rapports​/1998​/Bibliometric​_anal​-ysis​_scientific​_research​.pdf [11.07.2004].Google Scholar
Geisler, Eliezer
2000The metrics of science and technology. Westport, Connecticut and London: Quorum Books.Google Scholar
Gile, Daniel
2000 “The history of research into conference interpreting: A scientometric ap¬proach”. Target 12:2. 297–321.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2005 “Citation patterns in the T&I didactics literature”. Forum 3:2. 85–103, also http://​cirinandgile​.com​/05%20CitationTIdidacticsformatted​.rtf [07.11.2006]. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
2006 “L’interdisciplinarité en traductologie : Une optique scientométrique”. Sün¬düz Öztürk Kasar, ed. Interdisciplinarité en traduction, II. Istanbul: Isis, 23–37. also http://​cirinandgile​.com​/0206interdiscmethodIstanb​.doc [07.11.2006].Google Scholar
Glänzel, Wolfgang
2003Bibliometrics as a research field: A course on theory and application of bibliometric indicators. Leuven: Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, http://​www​.norslis​.net​/2004​/Bib​_Module​_KUL​.pdf [23.03.2007].Google Scholar
Glänzel, Wolfgang and András Schubert
2004 “Analysing scientific networks through co-au¬thorship”. Moed et al. 2004 257–276. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
[ p. 330 ]
Grbić, Nadja
1994Das Gebärdensprachdolmetschen als Gegenstand einer angewandten Sprach-und Translationswissenschaft unter besonderer Berücksichtigung der Situation in Österreich. University of Graz. [Doctoral dissertation,]Google Scholar
2007 “Where do we come from? What are we? Where are we Going? A biblio¬metrical analysis of writings and research on sign language interpreting”. The sign language translator & interpreter 1:1. 15–51.Google Scholar
Grbić, Nadja and Sonja Pöllabauer
2006a “Forschung zum Community Interpreting im deutschsprachigen Raum: Entwicklung, Themen und Trends”. Nadja Grbić and Sonja Pöl¬labauer, eds. “Ich habe mich ganz peinlich gefühlt”. Forschung im Kommunaldolmetschen in Österreich: Problemstellungen, Perspektiven und Potenziale. Graz: Institut für Theoretische und Angewandte Translationswissenschaft, University of Graz 2006 11–36. [= GTS—Graz Translation Studies, 10.]Google Scholar
2006b “Community interpreting: Signed or spoken? Types, modes, and methods”. Linguistica Antverpiensia NS5. 247–261.Google Scholar
Hanneman, Robert A. and Mark Riddle
2005Introduction to social network methods. Riverside, CA: University of California, Riverside, http://​faculty​.ucr​.edu​/~hanneman/ [05.02.2007].Google Scholar
Heyer, Gerhard Uwe Quasthoff and Thomas Wittig
2006Text Mining: Wissensrohstoff Text. Konzepte, Algorithmen, Ergebniss. Herdecke and Bochum: W3L-Verlag.Google Scholar
Hicks, Diana
2004 “The four literatures of social science”. Moed et al. 2004 473–495. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Hjørland, Birger
2005 “Scattering”. Core concepts in library and information science (LIS), http://​www​.db​.dk​/bh​/Core%20Concepts%20in%20LIS​/articles%20a​-z​/scattering​.htm [02.02.2007].Google Scholar
Jahn, Karen
2003Rechtskonflikte und forensische Begutachtung in Strafverfahren mit ausländi¬schen Beteiligten aus psychologischer Sicht. University of Münster. [Doctoral dissertation.]Google Scholar
Jansen, Dorothea
2003Einführung in die Netzwerkanalyse. Opladen: Leske + Budrich. [= UTB, 2241.]   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Knapp, Karlfried and Annelie Knapp-Potthoff
1985 “Sprachmittlertätigkeit in interkulturel¬ler Kommunikation”. Jochen Rehbein, ed. Interkulturelle Kommunikation. Tübingen: Narr 1985 450–463. [= Kommunikation und Institution, 12.]Google Scholar
Leydesdorff, Loet
2004 “The university-industry knowledge relationship: Analyzing patents and the science base of technology”. Journal of the American society for information science and technology 55:11. 991–1001, http://​users​.fmg​.uva​.nl​/lleydesdorff​/HiddenWeb​/index​.htm [22.03.2007].   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Lievrouw, Leah A.
1990 “Reconciling structure and process in the study of scholarly communi¬cation”. Borgman 1990a 59–69.Google Scholar
McEnery, Tony, Richard Xiao and Yukio Tono
2006Corpus-based language studies: An ad¬vanced resource book. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moed, Henk F., Wolfgang Glänzel and Ulrich Schmoch
eds. 2004Handbook of quantitative science and technology research: The use of publication and patent statistics in studies of S&T systems. Dordrecht, Boston and London: Kluwer Academic Publishers.Google Scholar
Ohly, H. Peter
2003 “Bibliometric mapping of selected research fields”. Bibliometric analysis in science and research: Applications, benefits and limitations. 2nd Conference of the Central Library. Jülich, 5–7 November 2003. Conference proceedings. Jülich: Forschungszentrum. Jü¬lich 2003 53–61. [= Schriften des Forschungszentrums Jülich, Reihe Bibliothek, 11.]Google Scholar
[ p. 331 ]
2004 “Bibliometrie in der Postmoderne”. Paper presented at the 9. Tagung der Deutschen ISKO (Wissensorganisation 2004), 5.–7. November 2004, Duisburg, http://​ www​.bonn​.iz​-soz​.de​/wiss​-org​/wissorg04​/isko2004papers​/Ohly​_BibliometriePostmoder¬ne1​.pdf [16.1.2007].
Pierce, Sydney J.
1990 “Disciplinary work and interdisciplinary areas: Sociology and bibliomet¬rics”. Scholarly communication and bibliometrics. Borgman 1990a 46–58.Google Scholar
Pöchhacker, Franz
1995a “Writings and research on interpreting: A bibliographic analysis”. The interpreters’ newsletter 6. 17–32.Google Scholar
1995b “”Those who do...’: A profile of research(ers) in interpreting”. TargetCrossref logoGoogle Scholar
1998 “Unity in diversity: The case of Interpreting Studies”. Lynne Bowker, ed. Unity in diversity?: Current trends in Translation Studies. Manchester: St. Jerome 1998 169–176.Google Scholar
2004Introducing interpreting studies. London and New York: Routledge. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Pöllabauer, Sonja
2003Translatorisches Handeln bei Asylanhörungen: Eine diskursanalytische Untersuchung. University of Graz. [Unpublished doctoral dissertation.]Google Scholar
2006 “”During the interview, the interpreter will provide a faithful translation’: The potentials and pitfalls of researching interpreting in immigration, asylum, and police settings: methodology and research paradigms”. Linguistica Antverpiensia NS5. 229–244.Google Scholar
Price, Derek J. de Solla
1963Little science, big science. New York: Columbia University Press. Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Prunč, Erich
2002Einführung in die Translationswissenschaft, Band 1: Orientierungsrahmen. Graz: Institut für Theoretische und Angewandte Translationswissenschaft, University of Graz. [= GTS—Graz Translation Studies, 3.]Google Scholar
Rehbein, Jochen
ed. 1985Interkulturelle Kommunikation. Tübingen: Narr. [= Kommunikation und Institution, 12.]Google Scholar
Sauerwein [Sami], Fadia
2005Dolmetschen bei polizeilichen Vernehmungen und grenzpolizeili¬chen Einreisebefragungen: Eine explorative translationswissenschaftliche Untersuchung zum Community Interpreting. University of Saarland. [Doctoral dissertation.]Google Scholar
Shlesinger, Miriam
1995 “Stranger in paradigms: What lies ahead for simultaneous interpret¬ing research?”. Target 7:1. 7–28.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Snell-Hornby, Mary, Franz Pöchhacker and Klaus Kaindl
eds. 1994Translation Studies—An interdiscipline. Selected papers from the Translation Studies Congress. Vienna 9.–12.9.1992. Amsterdam–Philadelphia: John Benjamins. [= Benjamins Translation Library, 2.]   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
Stock, Wolfgang
2001Publikation und Zitat: Die problematische Basis empirischer Wissen-schaftsforschung. Cologne: University of Applied Sciences Cologne. [= Kölner Arbeitspa¬piere zur Bibliotheks- und Informationswissenschaft, 29.] also http://​www​.fbi​.fh​-koeln​.de​/institut​/papers​/kabi​/volltexte​/band029​.pdf [29.3.2007].Google Scholar
Umstätter, Walther
2001 “Die Nutzung des Internets zur Fließbandproduktion von Wissen”. Klaus Fuchs-Kittowski, Heinrich Parthey, Walther Umstätter and Roland Wagner-Döbler, eds. Organisationsinformatik und Digitale Bibliothek in der Wissenschaft. Wissenschaftsfor¬schung Jahrbuch 2000. Sonderdruck. Berlin: Gesellschaft für Wissenschaftsforschung 2001 179–199.Google Scholar
2004 “Szientometrische Verfahren”. Rainer Kuhlen, Thomas Seeger and Dietmar Strauch, eds. Grundlagen der praktischen Information und Dokumentation, Vol. 1: Handbuch zur Einführung in die Informationswissenschaft und -praxis. München: KG Saur 2004 237–243.   Crossref logoGoogle Scholar
[ p. 332 ]
van Leeuwen, Thed
2004 “Descriptive versus evaluative bibliometrics: Monitoring and assess¬ing of national R&D systems”. Moed et al. 2004 373–388.Google Scholar
van Raan, Anthony F.J.
2004 “Measuring science: Capita selecta of current main issues”. Moed et al. 2004 19–50.Google Scholar
Weingart, Peter
2003 “Evaluation of research performance: The danger of numbers”. Bibliomet¬ric analysis in science and research: Applications, benefits and limitations. 2nd Conference of the Central Library. Jülich, 5–7 November 2003. Conference proceedings. Jülich: Forschungs-zentrum Jülich 2003 7–10. [= Schriften des Forschungszentrums Jülich, Reihe Bibliothek, 11.]Google Scholar